In 2016, Belgium introduced legislation mandating legal assistance for juvenile suspects. However, legal assistance can only serve as an effective procedural safeguard if it is provided appropriately. The current study examined how lawyers in Belgium fulfil this role in practice. Seventeen video-recorded police interviews of juvenile suspects were observed. The juveniles were aged between 12 and 17 years, and were suspected of various less serious, volume crimes. The findings of this study show that the ‘law in action’ does not always reflect the ‘law in the books’. The mere presence of a lawyer is insufficient: it is necessary for them to actively engage. Although police interviewers typically adopt an information-gathering approach, some interviews do require the lawyer’s intervention to protect the juvenile’s interests. Moreover, lawyers often restrict themselves to ‘legal’ assistance and offer limited (emotional) support. Because there is no ‘appropriate adult’ regime in Belgium, lawyers could take up this double role. The information-gathering approach also seems to enhance cooperation between lawyer and interviewer, resulting in a joint search for the truth in which neither adopts an antagonistic role when interviews are conducted properly.
ArehIWalshDBullR (2016) Police interrogation practice in Slovenia. Psychology, Crime and Law22(5): 405–419.
2.
BevanM (2020) Young suspect perspectives: An exploration of the factors affecting the uptake of legal advice by children in police custody. Criminal Law Review8: 686–706.
3.
BlackstockJCapeEHodgsonJOgorodovaASpronkenT (2014) Inside Police Custody: An Empirical Account of Suspects’ Rights in Four Jurisdictions. Antwerp: Intersentia.
4.
BullR (2013) What is ‘believed’ or actually ‘known’ about characteristics that may contribute to being a good/effective interviewer?Investigative Interviewing: Research and Practice5: 128–143.
5.
BullR (2019) Roar or PEACE: is it a tall story? In: BullRBlandon-GitlinI (eds) Routledge International Handbook of Legal and Investigative Psychology. London: Routledge, 20–36.
6.
BullRBaker-EckB (2020) Obtaining from suspects valid discourse ‘PEACE’-fully: what role for rapport and empathy? In: MasonMRockF (eds) The Discourse of Police Interviews. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 42–64.
7.
BullRRachlewA (2019) Investigative interviewing: from England to Norway and beyond. In: BarelaSFallonMGaggioliGOhlinJ (eds) Interrogation and Torture: Research on Efficacy, and its Integration with Morality and Legality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–196.
8.
CauffmanESteinbergL (2000) (Im)maturity of judgement in adolescence: why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences and the Law18(6): 741–760.
9.
ClaeysC (2017) Jongeren verhoord door de politie: kat-en-muisspel in de verhoorkamer? Een onderzoek naar het verhoor van minderjarige en jongvolwassen verdachten door recherche [Juveniles interviewed by the police: a cat-and-mouse game? A study on the interview of minor and young adult suspects by police detectives]. PhD Thesis, Free University of Brussels, Belgium.
10.
ClarkeCMilneB (2001) National Evaluation of the PEACE Investigative Interviewing Course. Home Office Research Series PRAS no. 149. London: Home Office.
11.
ClearyHMD (2014) Police interviewing and interrogation of juvenile suspects: a descriptive examination of actual cases. Law and Human Behavior38(3): 271–282.
12.
ClearyHMD (2017) Applying the lessons of developmental psychology to the study of juvenile interrogations: new directions for research, policy, and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law23(1): 118–130.
13.
ClearyHHDWarnerTC (2016) Police training in interviewing and interrogation methods: a comparison of techniques used with adult and juvenile suspects. Law and Human Behavior40(3): 270–284.
De MeesterTVenstermansW (2014) De omgang met de advocaat [Dealing with the laywer]. In: SchellingenRScholtenN (eds) Het verdachtenverhoor: meer dan het stellen van vragen [The Suspect Interview: More Than Asking Questions]. Mechelen, Belgium: Kluwer, 135–143.
16.
DehaghaniRNewmanD (2019) Can – and should – lawyers be considered ‘appropriate’ appropriate adults?The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice58(1): 3–24.
17.
DommicentJVanderhallenMBastiaensMDe WiestHVan De PlasMVervaekeG (2008) Interviewing children in Belgium: an evaluation. The Police Journal81(3): 248–261.
18.
FeldBC (2013a) Real interrogation: what actually happens when cops question kids. Law & Society Review47(1): 1–35.
19.
FeldBC (2013b) Kids, Cops and Confessions. New York: New York University Press.
20.
FennerSGudjonssonGHClareICH (2002) Understanding of the current police caution (England and Wales) among suspects in police detention. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology12(2): 83–93.
21.
GabbertFHopeLLutherKWrightGNgMOxburghGE (2020) Exploring the use of rapport in professional information-gathering contexts by systematically mapping the evidence base. Applied Cognitive Psychology35(2): 329–341.
22.
GarretBL (2010) The substance of false confessions. Stanford Law Review62(4): 1051–1119.
23.
GoldsonBMuncieJ (2012) Towards a global ‘child friendly’ juvenile justice?International Journal of Law Crime and Justice40: 47–64.
24.
GoochKvon BergP (2019) What happens in the beginning, matters in the end: achieving best evidence with child suspects in the police station. Youth Justice19(2): 85–101.
25.
GrissoTPomicterC (1977) Interrogation of juveniles: an empirical study of procedures, safeguards and rights waiver. Law and Human Behavior1(4): 321–342.
26.
GrissoTSteinbergLWoolardJCauffmanEScottEGrahamSLexcenFRepucciNSchwarzR (2003) Juveniles’ competence to stand trial: a comparison of adolescents’ and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior27(4): 333–364.
27.
GrossSRJacobyKMathesonDJMontgomeryNPatilS (2005) Exonerations in the United States: 1989 through 2003. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology95(2): 523–560.
28.
GudjonssonGH (2003) The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions: A Handbook. Chichester: Wiley.
29.
GudjonssonGH (2018) The Psychology of False Confessions: Forty Years of Science and Practice. Chichester: Wiley.
30.
Haney-CaronEGoldsteinNESMesiarikC (2018) Self-perceived likelihood of false confession. Criminal Justice and Behavior45(12): 1955–1976.
31.
HartwigMGranhagPAVrijA (2005) Police interrogation from a social psychology perspective. Policing & Society15(4): 379–399.
32.
HeilbrunKDeMatteoDGoldsteinNESLocklairBMurphyMGiallellaC (2016) Psychology and juvenile justice: human development, law, science, and practice. In: HeilbrunKDeMatteoDGoldsteinNES (eds) APA Handbook of Psychology and Juvenile Justice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 3–20.
33.
HenshawMSpivakBThomasSDM (2018) Striking the right balance: police experience, perceptions and use of independent support persons during interviews involving people with intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities31(2): e201–e211.
34.
HodgsonJ (2015) The role of lawyers during police detention and questioning: a comparative study. Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice7(2): 7–16.
35.
HolmbergUMadsenK (2014) Rapport operationalized as a humanitarian interview in investigative interview settings. Psychiatry Psychology & Law21(4): 591–610.
36.
HorselenbergRMerckelbachHSmeetsTFranssensDPetersGYZelesG (2006) False confessions in the lab: do plausibility and consequences matter?Psychology, Crime and Law12(1): 61–75.
37.
KassinSM (2005) On the psychology of confessions: does innocence put innocents at risk?American Psychologist60(3): 215–228.
38.
KassinSM (2015) The social psychology of false confessions. Social Issues and Policy Review9(1): 25–51.
KassinSMGudjonssonGH (2004) The psychology of confessions: a review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest5(2): 33–67.
41.
KassinSMApplebySCPerilloJT (2010) Interviewing suspects: practice, science, and future directions. Legal and Criminological Psychology15: 39–55.
42.
KassinSMRedlichADAlcesteFLukeTJ (2018) On the general acceptance of confessions research: opinions of the scientific community. The American Psychologist73(1): 63–80.
43.
KempVHodgsonJ (2016) England and Wales: empirical findings. In: VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia, pp. 127–181.
44.
KingKJ (2006) Waiving childhood goodbye: how juvenile courts fail to protect children from unknowing, unintelligent, and involuntary waivers of Miranda Rights. Wisconsin Law Review2: 431–477.
45.
LambMEHershkowitzIOrbachYEsplinPW (2008) Tell Me What Happened: Structured Investigative Interviews of Child Victims and Witnesses. Chichester: Wiley.
46.
Leahy-HarlandSBullR (2020) The impact of context on real-life serious crime interviews. Police Practice and Research22(1): 1009–1026.
47.
LiefaardTvan den BrinkY (2014) Juveniles’ right to counsel during police interrogations: an interdisciplinary analysis of a youth-specific approach, with a particular focus on the Netherlands. Erasmus Law Review4: 206–218.
MalloyLCShulmanEPCauffmanE (2014) Interrogations, confessions, and guilty pleas among serious adolescent offenders. Law and Human Behavior38(2): 181–193.
MedfordSGudjonssonGHPearseJ (2003) The efficacy of the appropriate adult safeguard during police interviewing. Legal and Criminological Psychology8(2): 253–266.
53.
MeissnerCAHorganAJAlbrechtsteinJS (2009) False confessions. In: KocsisRN (ed.) Applied Criminal Psychology. A Guide to Forensic Behavioral Sciences. Springfield, MA: Charles C Thomas, 191–195.
54.
MeissnerCAKellyCEWoestehoffSA (2015) Improving the effectiveness of suspect interrogations. Annual Review of Law and Social Science11: 211–233.
55.
MeissnerCARedlichADMichaelSWEvansJRCamilettiCRBhattSBrandonS (2014) Accusatorial and information-gathering interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology10(4): 459–486.
56.
MergaertsLDaeleDVervaekeG (2017) De beoordeling van de kwetsbaarheid van verdachten in strafprocedures: op zoek naar een conceptueel model [The assessment of suspect vulnerability in criminal proceedings: in search of a conceptual model]. Strafblad15: 520–527.
57.
MillerJCRedlichADKellyC (2018) Accusatorial and information-gathering interview and interrogation methods: a multi-country comparison, Psychology, Crime & Law24(9): 935–956.
58.
MinnaertM (2012) Politieverhoren in het post-Salduztijdperk [Police interviews in the post-Salduz era]. In: GoossensFBerkmoesHDuchateletAHutsebautF (eds) De Salduz-regeling. Theorie en praktijk, vandaag en morgen [The Salduz Regulation: Theory and Practice, Today and Tomorrow]. Brussels: Politeia, 19–47.
59.
MolsV (2017) Bringing directives on procedural rights of the EU to police stations: practical training for criminal defence lawyers. New Journal of European Criminal Law8(3): 300–308.
60.
NijhawanLPJanodiaMDMudduKrishnaBSBhatKMBairyKLUdupaNMusmadePB (2013) Informed consent: issues and challenges. Journal of Advance Pharmaceutical Technology & Research4(3): 134–140.
61.
OberlanderLBGoldsteinNE (2001) A review and update on the practice of evaluating Miranda comprehension. Behavioral Sciences & the Law19(4): 453–471.
62.
OgorodovaASpronkenT (2014) Legal advice in police custody: from Europe to a local police station. Erasmus Law Review4: 191–205.
63.
OtgaarHde RuiterCLa RooyDHorselenbergRHershkowitzIGeijsenK (2019) The burden of proof of the Dutch police: why the scenario model continues to deliver low quality child interviews. Applied Cognitive Psychology33(2): 901–903.
64.
Owen-KostelnikJReppucciNDMeyerJD (2006) Testimony and interrogation of minors: assumptions about maturity and morality. The American Psychologist61(4): 286–304.
65.
PanzavoltaMde VochtD (2015) Introduction. In: VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia, 1–5.
66.
PanzavoltaMde VochtDHodgsonJKempVVanderhallenMvan OosterhoutM (2016) Integrated analysis. In: VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia, 305–384.
67.
PearseJGudjonssonG (1996) How appropriate are appropriate adults?Journal of Forensic Psychiatry7(3): 570–580.
68.
PierpointH (2000) How appropriate are volunteers as ‘appropriate adults’ for young suspects? The ‘appropriate adult’ system and human rights, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law22(4): 383–400.
69.
PierpointH (2006) Reconstructing the role of the appropriate adult in England and Wales. Criminology & Criminal Justice6(2): 219–237.
70.
PierpointH (2008) Quickening the PACE? The use of volunteers as appropriate adults in England and Wales, Policing and Society18(4): 397–410.
71.
PierpointH (2011) Extending and professionalising the role of the appropriate adult. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law33(2): 139–155.
72.
PivatyA (2018) The right to custodial legal assistance in Europe: In search for the rationales. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice26(1): 62–98.
73.
PivatyAVanderhallenMDalyYConwayV (2019) Contemporary criminal defence practice: importance of active involvement at the investigative stage and related training requirements. International Journal of the Legal Profession27(1): 25–44.
74.
QuinnKJacksonJ (2007) Of rights and roles: police interviews with young suspects in Northern Ireland. The British Journal of Criminology47(2): 234–255.
75.
RapSEZlotnikD (2018) The right to legal and other appropriate assistance for child suspects and accused. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice2(26): 110–131.
76.
RedlichADGoodmanGS (2003) Taking responsibility for an act not committed: the influence of age and suggestibility. Law and Human Behavior27(2): 141–156.
77.
RedlichADSilvermanMChenJSteinerH (2004) The police interrogation of children and adolescents. In: LassiterGD (ed.) Perspectives in Law and Psychology. Vol. 20. Interrogations, Confessions, and Entrapment. New York: Kluwer Academic, 107–125.
78.
ReppucciNDMeyerJKostelnikJ (2010) Custodial interrogation of juveniles: results of a national survey of police. In: LassiterGDMeissnerCA (eds) Police Interrogations and False Confessions: Current Research, Practice, and Policy Recommendations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 67–80
79.
RogersRSteadhamJACarterRMHenrySADroginEYRobinsonEV (2016) An examination of juveniles’ Miranda abilities: investigating differences in Miranda recall and reasoning. Behavioural Sciences & the Law34: 515– 538.
80.
ScottESGrissoT, (1997) The evolution of adolescence: a developmental perspective on juvenile justice reform. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology88(1): 137–189.
81.
SimMPYLambME (2018) An analysis of how the police ‘caution’ is presented to juvenile suspects in England. Psychology, Crime and Law24(8): 851–872.
82.
VanderhallenMHodgsonJ (2016) Research methodology. In: VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia, 7–54.
83.
VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutM (2016) Belgium: empirical findings. In: VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia, 55–126.
84.
VanderhallenMde JongANelenHSpronkenT (2014) Toga’s in de verhoorkamer. De invloed van rechtsbijstand op het politieverhoor [Gowns in the Interrogation Room. The Influence of Legal Aid on Police Questioning]. The Hague: Boom Lemma Uitgevers.
85.
VanderhallenMvan OosterhoutMPanzavoltaMde VochtD (eds) (2016) Interrogating Young Suspects: Procedural Safeguards from an Empirical Perspective. Antwerp: Intersentia.
86.
ViljoenJLKlaverJRoeschR (2005) Legal decisions of preadolescent and adolescent defendants: predictors of confessions, pleas, communication with attorneys, and appeals. Law and Human Behavior29(3): 253–277.
87.
WalshDBullR (2012) Examining rapport in investigative interviews with suspects: does its building and maintenance work?Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology27: 73–84.
88.
WolbranskyMGoldsteinNESGialellaCHeilbrunK (2013) Collecting informed consent with juvenile justice populations: issues and implications for research. Behavioral Sciences and the Law31(4): 457–476.
89.
WoodyWDForrestKD (2020) Understanding Police Interrogation. Confessions and Consequences. New York: New York University Press.
Council of Europe, ‘Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on Child Friendly Justice (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 November 2010 at the 1098th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)’. Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
93.
Council of Europe, ‘European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, 4 November 1950’, ETS 5. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3b04.html[accessed 31 October 2020].
94.
European Commission (2003) Green Paper: Procedural Safeguards for Suspects and Defendants in Criminal Proceedings throughout the European Union. Brussels, 19 February 2003.
95.
European Union, Directive 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2016 on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings.
96.
European Union, Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty.
97.
Salduz Act, Belgian Law Gazette, 5 September 2011.
98.
Salduz Bis Act, Belgian Law Gazette, 24 November 2016.
99.
Salduz v Turkey [2008] ECHR 36391/02 [Grand Chamber] (27 November 2008).
100.
UK Home Office, Code of Practice C - Requirements for the detention, treatment and questioning of suspects not related to terrorism in police custody (2018), Note 1F.
